This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
An Independent Weekly Newspaper

Hudson~Litchfield News

Hudson~Litchfield News Volume 22 Number 6 August 19, 2011 20 Pages

Hudson Rec Sand Castle Contest is ‘Funtastically Amazing’

by Tom Tollefson Last Friday at Robinson Pond, children could be seen scampering through the sand digging up holes and creating sand molds of all designs for the Hudson Recreation Summer Program’s annual sand castle contest. Jamie, 13, described this competition as “funtastically amazing.” “Every year, the kids look forward to this contest and prepare their designs throughout the summer.

It’s exciting to watch how their

creativity grows year after year,” Hudson Recreation Summer Program Director Kim Buyccarelli said. The first place sand castle team was made

up of Adam, 10, Madeline, 10, Kelly, 10, Aaliyah, 9, Sam, 12, Kayla, 11, and Alissa, 11. Following was the second place team with Maddy, 12 and Jaime, 13. The third place team was made up of Brianna, 13, Jamie, 7, Laiza, 8, and Emily, 14. “It feels awesome that we won, and it was fun building with my friends to win a contest,”

Calvin, 7, and Mitchell, 9, play in the sand Old Home Days Hudson

Supported Through Advertisers ECRWSS



HUDSON, NH 03051

PERMIT NO. 33 Postal Customer

see more on page 9

Selectmen Report to Board

Left to right, first place team: Adam, 10, Madeline, 10, Kelly, 10, Aaliyah, 9, Sam, 12, Kayla, 11, and Alissa, 11

Adam 10, said about his team’s first place for their creation. It was complete with a moat, bridge, and freshly picked flowers for decoration. The second place sand castle was also decked out with

a floral feel. “I got my idea from my friend and we used flowers. We thought of making it like a garden,” Jamie 7, said. This design also consisted of two rows of sand molds

centered around a moat with rocks, and sticks in addition to the flowers. Jamie and Maddy’s second place castle took a rockier look with pebbles aligning the road between their sand molds.

Others in the competition also enjoyed the “sandy” day. “I thought it was fun even if I didn’t win, and I liked helping other people with their castles,” said Mariska, 8.

Regarding the Combining of Hudson’s Inspection Services

by Doug Robinson Selectmen Roger Coutu and

Community Input Gathered on Spending Proposals

by Lynne Ober The Litchfield School Board held a Community Forum on the school district budget adjustment special meeting. Vice Chairman Mary Prindle made a presentation to the audience gathered in Campbell High School’s auditorium and explained how the board wanted to spend the additional educational funding that the town would receive from the state. She asked the audience for their input, and at the end of the meeting, the audience could rank their priorities. Litchfield operates under the Municipal Budget Act and because of that, it must budget gross revenues and gross expenditures. After the legislature passed new educational funding legislation, Litchfield was going to get approximately $2 million more in revenue than anticipated. This led to the community forum in order for the board to hear from the community on a variety of proposals. Class sizes in Litchfield are well

below the state recommended class sizes. The third grade at Griffin Memorial School will be the largest class at that school with an average projected class size of 22.8 students per classroom. Kindergarten is the smallest with an estimated 17 students per classroom. In Litchfield Middle School class

sizes range from a low of 20.8 students per classroom in seventh grade to a high of 25.1 in eighth grade with state recommended class sizes of 30 per class room. Superintendent Dr. Elaine Cutler,

explained that Campbell has been losing population and class sizes in core subjects ranging from a high of 21 per class in English to a low of 19 in social studies.

Prindle presented board proposed adjustments to the budget before opening the floor to comments and questions.

At Griffin the board would like to increase the budget by $200,527 by restoring five positions to the school. These are the Assistant Principal position for $76,906, the librarian to full-time for an additional $45,497, two program paraprofessionals at $34,958 and a custodian at $40,823. They also want to add $2,343 to extend the work year of guidance by five days and the school nurse by two days. The Middle School proposals

would add $207,354 by restoring four positions plus extra days for guidance and the nurse. As with Griffin, the board proposes to move the librarian from part time to full time for an additional $51,043, restore a special education teacher for $76,722, restore a custodian for $60,419 and restore a receptionist for $14,570. The school would also like to add an additional ten days for guidance and two days for the school nurse would cost $4,600. Campbell High School proposal

would add $199,861 to the budget and the most controversial items were at Campbell. The board encumbered at the end of last year money to rehabilitate the track. In their proposal is another $22,000

for a “more durable surface” for the track. They also proposed to add partial funding for the First Robotics team at a $5,000 level. This proposal led to questions about why the board wasn’t providing the same level of support for wrestling and hockey, two other parent supported programs and why they only proposed to add money for the robotics team. The board wanted to add $6,000 for the adult education program. Conversations in the hallway surrounded why this program was not completely funded by the participants and why it was funded at all with tax payer dollars.

In addition, the computer lease has been under-budgeted by $3,644. At Campbell the board proposed to restore an English teacher for $48,533, three program paraprofessionals for $54,900, the receptionist for $16,982, the library paraprofessional for $11,429 and move a custodian from part time to full time for an additional $28,191. An additional $2,576 was asked to add five days to guidance and two days for the school nurse.

A Campbell student asked during public input why a custodian would be added for $60,000 when other teachers had been cut at Campbell. Cutler explained that enrollments had gone down and class sizes were smaller than in previous years. At the district level the board proposed to restore the Director

continued to page 5- Spending Proposals

Selectman Richard Maddox reported to the Board of Selectmen their recommendations for the combining of the various inspectional devices at the Tuesday, August 16, Board of Selectmen’s meeting. Maddox and Coutu explained the processes they went through in order to formulate their final recommendation. They stated,“At the April 5, 2011 Board of Selectmen meeting it was requested that myself and selectmen Coutu sit down with the Fire Department and Community Development to look at the feasibility of combining into one department all inspections for the town of Hudson,” Maddox added, “Selectman Coutu and I met several times with Fire Department and Community Development personnel. At one of the meetings the Fire Chiefs from Bedford, NH and Merrimack, NH were present along with their inspectional service people.” After meeting with comparable N.H.

towns, the selectman adapted what they had learned in regards to the town of Hudson. “Issues that need discussion are: space planning, training, reporting structure and long range planning/ requirements for these services,” They added, “During this process there was concern that one of our inspectors may be leaving to go to another community for full-time employment. Also during this period we were looking into the feasibility of combined dispatch as well as the departure of a deputy chief from the fire department. “Will all of the above, it is our

recommendation that the inspections that are done by the Fire Department presently, continued to be done by them.

Inspections that are done by

Community Development continue to be done, at this point, by them. That said, I think we need to look at

the entire Community Development Department and how in the future we can possibly merge these two groups together.” Recommendations by Coutu and

Maddox stated: “For the short term we should be

looking to make the customer have a simpler and more efficient experience in dealing with inspections in Hudson. To this end, we should make the counter in Community Development the place to get all permits, other than burn permits. With a little reshuffling of paper work and training of staff, a customer could come to one counter a write one check for all of their permits and not have to go downstairs to engineering, over to the fire administration building, as well as community development. “One person should be responsible

for the scheduling of all of the inspectors so that the customer can call one number and get all of their inspections scheduled, hopefully bringing two or three inspectors to the site at one time for better utilization of our and the customers time. At this point the most logical choice would be to utilize Mrs. Kennedy, who is presently scheduling the Community Development inspectors and as such would only need to add Engineering and the Fire Department to her Outlook calendars to be able to facilitate coordinated scheduling. “Looking longer-term and after, we

have dealt with combined dispatch we should look at exactly what our customer’ needs are in regards to inspection and the time and manpower necessary to perform said inspections. We believe that at this junction combined dispatch is a higher priority. We should implement items above and put onto an agenda for the spring of 2012 to look at this issue again would the most productive at this time.”


Please excues any confusion caused by last week story on start dates of Hudson schools. Hudson goes back to school on Tuesday August, 30, while Litchfield preceeds them a day going back on Monday August, 29. Hudson bus schedules are provided on pages 14 and 15.

staff photo by Tom Tollefson

staff photo by Len Lathrop

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20